After conducting an environmental review, NextEra determined wind power is not a reasonable alternative for the power generated by Seabrook Station within the time period under discussion.
The prevailing reason was the “intermittent nature” of wind power, according to court documents. A constant supply of “baseload” energy derived from offshore wind turbines would likely require energy storage units, according to NextEra, driving up the total price of an offshore wind project.
The environmental groups challenged that claim in a petition filed on Oct. 20, 2010. They argue baseload power can be provided by either storing wind power or creating a network of offshore wind farms.
The federal judges who evaluated SAPL’s appeal did not find those arguments persuasive.

SEABROOK – A lawsuit filed by three environmental and anti-nuclear groups hoping to intervene in the relicensing of Seabrook Station has been dismissed by federal judges.

The Seacoast Anti-Pollution League (SAPL), based in Exeter, is among the three groups. They argue that wind power could potentially replace the power generated at Seabrook Station.

In 2010, the groups asked the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for permission to present evidence about the viability of wind power at a formal hearing. An NRC board initially granted the request, but the decision was overturned last year.

The NRC determined that wind power technology that could replace Seabrook Station does not appear to be commercially viable in the “relatively near term.”

SAPL appealed the NRC’s decision to the 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, joined by the New Hampshire Sierra Club and Beyond Nuclear, a national “safe energy organization” headquartered in Maryland.

The groups argued that the NRC’s decision was “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or not otherwise in accordance with the law.”

After hearing oral arguments in the case in November, the appeals court judges ruled last week that the NRC acted appropriately when it decided to prevent SAPL and the other organizations from intervening.

The decision was partially based on the fact that Seabrook Station generates so-called “baseload power” for New England’s power grid.

The nuclear plant generates 8.2 percent of the power in the network, which coordinates the movement of wholesale electricity in parts of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

Under federal environmental laws, plant operators such as NextEra Energy – which controls Seabrook Station – are required to assess the environmental impacts of their facilities when seeking a license renewal. Such environmental reviews must include consideration of alternative energy sources.

After conducting an environmental review, NextEra determined wind power is not a reasonable alternative for the power generated by Seabrook Station within the time period under discussion.

The prevailing reason was the “intermittent nature” of wind power, according to court documents. A constant supply of “baseload” energy derived from offshore wind turbines would likely require energy storage units, according to NextEra, driving up the total price of an offshore wind project.

The environmental groups challenged that claim in a petition filed on Oct. 20, 2010. They argue baseload power can be provided by either storing wind power or creating a network of offshore wind farms.

The federal judges who evaluated SAPL’s appeal did not find those arguments persuasive.

They ruled that the NRC did not err in interpreting federal environmental laws when it cut SAPL out of the process.

Further, they substantiated the approach being taken by the NRC relative to assessing the viability of alternative energy sources.

The NRC believes that a “reasonable energy alternative” is one that is currently commercially viable, or one that will be viable in the “relatively near term.”

The judges also found that the intervening groups failed to respond to the question of how wind power would provide baseload power without the addition of costly storage equipment.

“The NRC’s decision was not arbitrary or capricious and there is no basis in law to set it aside,” the ruling reads.

Seabrook Station’s operating license will expire March, 15, 2030. NextEra contacted the NRC two years ago seeking to renew the license for the nuclear power plant for another 20 years, through 2050.

“I’ve increasingly had the suspicion that our justice system is sometimes lacking in common sense concern for the public interest when it comes to corporate and governmental prerogatives,” SAPL Executive Director Doug Bogen said in a prepared statement, responding to the latest court decision. “This ruling appears to confirm that suspicion. “NRC intransigence in addition to state government inaction has practically guaranteed that the public will have no voice when it comes to a key future energy policy decision – the relicensing of our local nuclear plant,” Bogen concluded.

Two other citizen groups, Friends of the Coast and the New England Coalition, are also challenging the relicensing of Seabrook Station. Hearings are still pending on the contentions they have filed.

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article is owned by the author or publisher indicated. Its availability here constitutes a "fair use" as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law as well as in similar "fair dealing" exceptions of the copyright laws of other nations, as part of National Wind Watch's noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information. For more information, click here. Send takedown inquiry or request to excerpt to query/wind-watch.org. Send general inquiries and comments to query/wind-watch.org.